Raptors analytics... and an internal rift? [post #67]

Quote:

---

ceez wrote:

Probably the most interesting article I've read in a long time. I also love how it passive aggressively shits all over our players and coaching.

If the team is so pro analytics, why do we have so many inefficient players? This seriously boggles my mind.

---

Very well said. I was thinking the same thing. All I could think about as I was reading this is a) how can our coaches be so oblivious to all of this stuff and b) how can our GM have spent so much time collecting inefficient players (and no good 3 point shooters!).

Its like we have this little experiment going on, but haven't actually applied any of it to how we run or coach the team. Seems like a colossal waste of time and money unless we actually start applying some of this stuff ...

Quote:

---

NoPropsneeded wrote:

doesn't that mean he's actually an ok coach. Just had sub par players to work with...and boshtrich

---

Either that, or he got lucky with a mismatch of players who happened to gel quickly, and took advantage of a weak Atlantic Division for 1 season.

Quote:

---

It is not as if the Raptors, aside from the coaching staff, have been a paragon of adherence to analytics, though. Bryan Colangelo gave Andrea Bargnani a five-year, US$50-million contract after his third year. In Bargnani’s first three years, according to player efficiency rating, he was a below-average offensive player twice and an average offensive player once, with well-conceded shortcomings both defensively and on the glass. As Bargnani has shifted into a bigger role offensively since Chris Bosh’s departure, his efficiency has dropped notably, and his deficiencies have remained. Still, he remained a focal point of this team until this year, when injuries derailed his season.

Similarly, Colangelo gave DeMar DeRozan a four-year, US$38-million extension in October. In his first three years, DeRozan was an inconsistent offensive player, with a PER below the league average each season and a personal defensive rating below that of the Raptors’ overall mark. Despite incremental improvement, those two statements remain true this year.

The investment in data-driven analysis by the Raptors should be applauded — it will likely only grow in importance in the NBA. But until everybody involved, from Colangelo to Casey to the analytics team itself, is more willing to use the findings to question their own assumptions rather than just looking to support their pre-existing beliefs, the work being done can scarcely help the Raptors become a winner.

---

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/...y-be-realized/

It's all well and good to be using SportsVu. But if you're not using the results to make basketball decisions (on or off the court), what the fawk is the point?

Quote:

---

Nilanka wrote:

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/...y-be-realized/

It's all well and good to be using SportsVu. But if you're not using the results to make basketball decisions (on or off the court), what the fawk is the point?

---

Exactly. Its like were running the funny farm around here. Very, very encouraging that we are at the forefront of this stuff. Very, very discouraging that our coach and GM dont seem to use this data to help the team.

Quote:

---

Nilanka wrote:

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/...y-be-realized/

It's all well and good to be using SportsVu. But if you're not using the results to make basketball decisions (on or off the court), what the fawk is the point?

---

Quote:

---

mountio wrote:

Exactly. Its like were running the funny farm around here. Very, very encouraging that we are at the forefront of this stuff. Very, very discouraging that our coach and GM dont seem to use this data to help the team.

---

On one hand, if I were to give BC credit, I could argue that he publically talks up his players, while understanding behind the scenes who doesn't fit, analytically speaking (ie: Bargnani, DeRozan).

On the other hand, there's an analytical (not to mention $) reason why Hollinger supported dumping Gay, so that seems to throw the first theory out the window.


I think it shows that a bunch of the fans/stat-heads on RR are ahead of the curve, when using a combination of skill/potential/analytics to evaluate Raptors players and 'fit' together. Gay, DeRozan and even Bargnani could be solid contributors on the right team in the right circumstance, but clearly having them all on the same team is a horrible idea. I think several posters have even gone so far as to conclude that a good team can't afford to have more than 1 analytically poor player in the lineup together (ie: inefficient volume scorers). I think Bargnani is as good as gone, but it will be interesting to see what becomes of DeRozan in the offseason.

Quote:

---

JimiCliff wrote:

He can learn by being given more court time. The idea that taking away a player's minutes when they blow an assignment doesn't hold water to me, unless it's clear that they're willfully contradicting what they've been told to do. But if they just aren't able to 'get it' yet but are making an effort, I say let them play through their mistakes. Especially in Jonas' case, because the numbers show that he can make up for his mistakes.

---

I go away for a day and this thread has doubled!!

Learning and court time is very difficult. You hear the saying "Play through mistakes" all the time, but unfortunately that only works if the mistake is instantly recognized by the player, and they are able to self-correct because they know the right way. That works for things like over-dribbling, soft passes, staring down your target, etc. Mostly offensive details which are obvious to even the most casual fan (i.e. - passing to the wrong team because you stared down your target too long and missed the guard playing the passing lane). Unfortunately, defence is a much subtler art form which is why it is increasingly difficult to teach. It is much easier to show someone how to dribble and pass and for them to quickly recognize an error. But to miss a defensive rotation or take a bad angle while hedging a screen is significantly more difficult to guage. To ask a player, especially a rookie, to make that kind of self-aware analysis of his actions, both as an individual and with-in the team concept, while the game is going on isn't realistic.

Taking the player out of the game, talking to them on the bench, showing them what they did and what they are to do is the only way a player can learn from that type of subtle mistake.

Now ideally, JV would come to the bench for a quick chat, look for the play again, and seen see video after the game, while getting another shot. I can't and wont defend Casey to gluing him to the bench for long stretches, but to simply let him learn on the fly is the recipe for an undisciplined defender who will take too many chances because he has never learned properly. I see this all the time in practice when I coach the high school boys team. Those who have learned the hard way are much better off than those who got to play through everything.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/basketball/n...-raptors-camp/

Quote:

---

Raptors president and general manager Bryan Colangelo was quick to deny any rift between the two sides.

“There is absolutely no rift between the front office and coaches concerning the use of analytics,” he answered via email. “If anything, it’s more about coaches and management (the basketball guys) challenging the analytics team (the numbers guys) on the premise that you disregard or abandon pure and simple basketball ideology. Healthy debate is surely part of the process, but we are all learning and evolving in this very interesting space.”

---

Quote:

---

Axel wrote:

I go away for a day and this thread has doubled!!

Learning and court time is very difficult. You hear the saying "Play through mistakes" all the time, but unfortunately that only works if the mistake is instantly recognized by the player, and they are able to self-correct because they know the right way. That works for things like over-dribbling, soft passes, staring down your target, etc. Mostly offensive details which are obvious to even the most casual fan (i.e. - passing to the wrong team because you stared down your target too long and missed the guard playing the passing lane). Unfortunately, defence is a much subtler art form which is why it is increasingly difficult to teach. It is much easier to show someone how to dribble and pass and for them to quickly recognize an error. But to miss a defensive rotation or take a bad angle while hedging a screen is significantly more difficult to guage. To ask a player, especially a rookie, to make that kind of self-aware analysis of his actions, both as an individual and with-in the team concept, while the game is going on isn't realistic.

Taking the player out of the game, talking to them on the bench, showing them what they did and what they are to do is the only way a player can learn from that type of subtle mistake.

Now ideally, JV would come to the bench for a quick chat, look for the play again, and seen see video after the game, while getting another shot. I can't and wont defend Casey to gluing him to the bench for long stretches, but to simply let him learn on the fly is the recipe for an undisciplined defender who will take too many chances because he has never learned properly. I see this all the time in practice when I coach the high school boys team. Those who have learned the hard way are much better off than those who got to play through everything.

---

1st bold: I would show them after the game, or the next day, or during practice. That's part of the reason why this data being collected is so useful; plays can be broken down, and watched over and over. Although apparently Casey refuses to share any of this information with the players; add that to the list of maddening facts about how the Raps are making use of their analytics.

2nd bold: I just disagree that, at the NBA level, this is will create undisciplined defenders. At the high school level, sure, because the coach has relatively little access to each player throughout their season/career. But for an NBA player, their entire life is devoted to making them be better at basketball. Their are multiple hours available essentially every day for coaches, assistant coaches, and video dudes to be working with each player, helping them learn the game and correct their mistakes. What's scarce for an NBA player is actual game time, which is why I feel they should given as much of it as possible unless it's very clear that they're in wayyyyy over their head.

If there is any spin going on, I think it's about replacing Casey, not with a veteran, but a young coach; maybe an assistant from Houston or Denver.

Quote:

---

Soft Euro wrote:

If there is any spin going on, I think it's about replacing Casey, not with a veteran, but a young coach; maybe an assistant from Houston or Denver.

---

I hope not. We've been through enough assistants

Wish Brad Stevens was an option.

From

Quote:

---

slaw wrote:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/basketball/n...-raptors-camp/

---

I find this quote very interesting:

Quote:

---

"Our customers and fans want more and we are finding ways to deliver it to them."

---

That's BC talking about why they're going public with this.

I'm not sure exactly what to make of it. But the notion that I want much more of anything to do with this team is borderline sadistic.

Quote:

---

JimiCliff wrote:

1st bold: I would show them after the game, or the next day, or during practice. That's part of the reason why this data being collected is so useful; plays can be broken down, and watched over and over. Although apparently Casey refuses to share any of this information with the players; add that to the list of maddening facts about how the Raps are making use of their analytics.

2nd bold: I just disagree that, at the NBA level, this is will create undisciplined defenders. At the high school level, sure, because the coach has relatively little access to each player throughout their season/career. But for an NBA player, their entire life is devoted to making them be better at basketball. Their are multiple hours available essentially every day for coaches, assistant coaches, and video dudes to be working with each player, helping them learn the game and correct their mistakes. What's scarce for an NBA player is actual game time, which is why I feel they should given as much of it as possible unless it's very clear that they're in wayyyyy over their head.

---

Bold #1: Studies show that people (in general, not specific to athletes or basketball players) learn best with immediate correction. Waiting until the next day or after the game is missing the opportunity to have the greatest impact. You use the film room to reinforce what you preach in practice, but you need to point things out at the time they happened for the player to have the best understanding.

Bold #2: NBA players learn the same way regular people learn, they just happen to be taller, faster and have more time to spend on refining the skills. But at the end of the day, a player learns the same way as any other person. Being in the NBA doesn't grant you omniscient awareness of basketball and often times these players lack the self-awareness because they have been insulated from criticism their whole lives. That is why role players and point guards typically go on to be successful head coaches while stars can't make the transition.

Perspective is everything and it is nearly impossible to gain it while running up and down the court. If JV spends his time trying to figure out the rotation assignment on the pick and roll with a corner 3 threat, then he is likely to miss the action right now and screw up another assignment. He needs the chance to process what is happening and that simply cannot happen in game at the NBA level. The game is way too fast. What is the #1 thing rookies say about the transition from NCAA to NBA? The speed of the game. You don't have time to think about what just happened because you need to be focused on the now at all times.

Quote:

---

Axel wrote:

Bold #1: Studies show that people (in general, not specific to athletes or basketball players) learn best with immediate correction. Waiting until the next day or after the game is missing the opportunity to have the greatest impact. You use the film room to reinforce what you preach in practice, but you need to point things out at the time they happened for the player to have the best understanding

---

JimiCliff's point wasn't that he's against direct feedback. It was what he suggested under the premise that direct feedback during playing time was not possible.

Furthermore, you say that studies show that people learn best with immediate correction. That defintely isn't the case in all learning and their are plenty of studies about that ...

The NBA... Where learning happens

Quote:

---

Axel wrote:

Bold #1: Studies show that people (in general, not specific to athletes or basketball players) learn best with immediate correction. Waiting until the next day or after the game is missing the opportunity to have the greatest impact.
You use the film room to reinforce what you preach in practice, but you need to point things out at the time they happened for the player to have the best understanding.

Bold #2: NBA players learn the same way regular people learn, they just happen to be taller, faster and have more time to spend on refining the skills. But at the end of the day, a player learns the same way as any other person. Being in the NBA doesn't grant you omniscient awareness of basketball and often times these players lack the self-awareness because they have been insulated from criticism their whole lives. That is why role players and point guards typically go on to be successful head coaches while stars can't make the transition.

Perspective is everything and it is nearly impossible to gain it while running up and down the court. If JV spends his time trying to figure out the rotation assignment on the pick and roll with a corner 3 threat, then he is likely to miss the action right now and screw up another assignment. He needs the chance to process what is happening and that simply cannot happen in game at the NBA level. The game is way too fast. What is the #1 thing rookies say about the transition from NCAA to NBA? The speed of the game. You don't have time to think about what just happened because you need to be focused on the now at all times.

---

Will pulling them out after a single missed play to correct their mistake better help them with that specific mistake? Maybe (and this specific case is actually very, very complicated compared to the studies you're mentioning) but that circumstance (mistake, hook, quickly re-inserted into game) essentially never happens in the NBA anyways, so I'm not sure that we're even arguing about anything real anymore. My point was that Casey just wasn't playing him enough in general. So then it becomes the case of, are we going to pull him out after every little mistake, or are we going to give him a little rope? I'd give rope. But I'll bet that neither of us could find definitive proof for either of our arguments, so I'm just going to agree to disagree :)